Supreme Court Says No (Again) to Trump in E. Jean Carroll Case
The US Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump's request to reconsider a verdict that found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll. This is the second time the Court has said no to revisiting the case (Al Jazeera; SCOTUSblog).
The decision appeared on the Court's August 17, 2026 order list. The justices handled 33 pending requests at once and gave no explanation. That is normal when they act on these kinds of requests during their summer break (Al Jazeera). The case started in a lower court called the Second Circuit, which issued its decision on December 30, 2024 (Supreme Court docket).
Trump first asked the Supreme Court to take up the case in November 2025. His legal team argued that the trial judge should not have allowed certain evidence — specifically, testimony about Trump's past behavior that his lawyers said was unfair to include (petition and appendix). The justices declined to hear the appeal in June 2026. Trump then asked them to reconsider that refusal. The August 17 order says no to that request (Al Jazeera).
The original verdict came from a jury in 2023. The jury found Trump liable for $5 million in damages. The case was about things Trump said in 2022, when he called Carroll's allegation a "hoax" and a "con job" on social media. Defamation means publicly making false statements that damage someone's reputation. The jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation (Al Jazeera). After the Supreme Court declined to hear Trump's appeal in June, Carroll collected the $5 million plus interest, bringing the total to about $5.8 million (Al Jazeera).
Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said the jury's unanimous verdict is now final and cannot be challenged in any court (Al Jazeera). The legal fight between Trump and Carroll started in 2019, when Carroll published part of her memoir. In it, she said Trump had raped her in a dressing room at a Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in 1996 (Al Jazeera).
The $5 million verdict is one of two separate lawsuits Carroll has won against Trump. A second jury awarded her $83.3 million in a 2024 lawsuit. Trump is currently appealing that judgment to the Supreme Court. He argues that presidential immunity — a legal rule that can protect a president from certain lawsuits over things done while in office — should shield him because the statements were made while he was president (Al Jazeera).
The broader context here is the legal strategy Trump has built around presidential immunity. The $5 million case involved statements Trump made in 2022 as a private citizen, so immunity did not apply. The $83.3 million case is different because the statements were made while Trump was president. That puts it within the framework the Supreme Court set up in a 2024 ruling about presidential immunity in a separate election-related case. If the Court applies that rule strictly, the second Carroll appeal raises questions about how far immunity goes when a sitting president makes public statements about a private citizen.
The August 17 denial does not affect the $83.3 million appeal, which is still pending before the Court. What the order does settle is the first Carroll verdict. With the rehearing request denied and the money collected, that case is finished.
